NEWTON — The Sussex County freeholders have received inch-thick binders with answers to more than a dozen questions they posed to the administration at Sussex County Community College about the process that led to lone bid to upgrade the air conditioning for the school’s main academic building.

The blue binders, coupled with even more information contained on an included computer disc, were delivered to the board’s office late Friday and board members picked up their copies on Monday.

“I’m still reading mine,” said Freeholder Director Rich Vohden late Tuesday afternoon. “I haven’t found anything that stands out, yet, but I still have some questions. I’m curious to see what the third attorney’s report will be.”

In late May, the college’s Board of Trustees approved a contract for the upgrades to Building D to Echelon Services, a Newton-based company that appears to have a single owner/employee.

The firm’s bid to do work on the building, which incl udes replacing windows, most exterior doors and some structural work, was $2.888 million, about $850,000 more than the last estimate by CP Engineering, the firm hired by the college for engineering services on the job.

When the one bid was received, the college’s attorney, John Ursin, recused himself since he is attorney of record for Echelon, and just the engineering firm and the college’s purchasing officer went over the bid.

Subsequent to the award, it has been revealed that there were possible conflicts of interest between at least two board members and CP Engineering, including board chairman Glenn Gavan, and attorney who represents the company in some legal matters, and the board secretary Glen Vetrano, who last week resigned from the board.

In a news release, Vetrano admitted that he had been paid “a modest stipend” of about $13,000 by the engineering company “as an advisor to the company since its inception in 2012.”

Although he served in an advisory role to CP Engineers, Vetrano said, “I have not provided any counsel regarding the firm’s dealing with Sussex County Community College.”

The vacancy created by Vetrano’s resignation is one of two positions on the 11-member board that are governor’s appointments. Eight other members are appointed b y the county while the 11th member is the executive county school superintendent.

The 14 questions technically came from the Community College Board of School Estimate, made up of three of the county freeholders and two college trustees, but it was the freeholder members who had the questions about the bid procedure and how the college planned to pay for the job, which now will cost about $3.4 million, when engineering fees are included.

The Board of School Estimate came up with the questions after it was asked to take action — which was later delayed — on moving funds around in several school construction bond issues to help pay for the increased cost of the project.

That came at a meeting on June 25.

Not included in the binder were any answers about the apparent conflicts of interest involving Gavan and Vetrano, brought forward in a July 11 story in the New Jersey Herald.

Vetrano seconded, then voted in favor of, a motion at the trustee’s April 2013, meeting to hire CP Engineering. He has since abstained from any votes since that time.

However, the binder has minutes for a March 2013 trustee meeting as part of its answer to a question asking about the bid process. Those minutes show that Gavan voted “yes” to accept CP Engineers’ proposal to do work for the college.

The minutes show that the company was “willing to do work on a non-funded basis while exploring and formulating potential projects. They would then become involved on a funded basis when the projects are ready to go.”

Vetrano abstained from that vote.

Also in the binder in answer to the question regarding the bid process is a copy of the resolution that hired CP Engineering last December as the engineer on the Building D project at a cost of $346,400.

The binder does not include minutes of that special meeting. The minutes posted on the college’s web site show that the fee was “not to exceed $346,400,” an amendment to the first motion.

At the time, CP Engineering said a compressed construction schedule — one year instead of two summer construction seasons — would bring their fee down to $304,000.

The special meeting occurred at 9 a.m. with five trustees attending in person and two attending by telephone, something done often at trustee meetings.

When it came time for the vote however, both Gavan and Vetrano abstained and only four “yes” votes were recorded. There is no mention of how the seventh trustee voted or whether she was still at the meeting when the vote was taken.

Gavan, who is moving his law office from its current location in the building owned by CP Engineering and used as company headquarters, to Main Street in Newton, did not return a telephone call seeking comment about that vote.

Last week, Gavan left a message for a reporter at the New Jersey Herald acknowledging he had received a message about an earlier story, but would have no comment relating to the issues surrounding the Building D work.

The binder contains the 14 numbered questions, each of which contain several sub-questions. Many of the college’s answers require reading lengthy documents, which are included in the binder, to get the information.

Among documents on the computer disc are detailed engineering drawings of the work to be done.

Since the Dec. 13 special meeting, CP Engineering’s fee on the building has increased to more than $357,000 with another $93,800 to be paid to the company for “additional staff during construction.”

In an April 16 memo to Frank Nocella, the college’s vice president of Finance & Operations, the CP Engineering managing partner Stanley Puszcz, explained the additional staff would be required because there would be multiple crews working on the project and the extra staff “will enable us to perform the independent inspections to confirm the work so as to enable progress and keep the project on schedule.”

The “lump sum increase” of $147,200 was actually a savings to the college.

“Our previous fee was 17.4% of construction costs,” Puszcz wrote in the memo. “This new fee is 16.5%.”

At the $2.888 million bid from Echelon, and with CP Engineers being paid $451,200, the project cost now is at $3.34 million. Total engineering fees are about 15.6 percent of construction costs.

While there was a 60-day window after awarding the bid, the college has yet to sign a contract with Echelon although the company’s owner, Jason Colanno has sent a letter to the school agreeing to an extension.

Nocella repeated earlier this week that the administration is waiting for a report from the Saiber law firm that was hired earlier this month to conduct an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the project.

The hiring of Saiber came less than a week after the college engaged the law firm of Courter, Kobert & Cohen, former counsel to the college, to go over the bid procedures.

The firm produced two letters, bracketed around a New Jersey Herald story that raised questions on oversight of the bid process, which said the college complied with the law in relation to awarding the bid to Echelon.

Vohden said it is unlikely the Board of School Estimate would meet until late August, after the Saiber report is expected.